16 Comments:

I felt her first ad was way off base, and dishonest (albeit in the typical, zombie partisan fashion that partisans seem to think is 'harmless'); this one, though, was definitely worth seeing. I hope GritGirl updates the video to include your senator link.

I don't find it all that convincing. The first quote used is from September 8, after the TSX fell 8% in one week. I didn't watch the Flaherty comment in full, but it sounds more like he's speaking of months and years before the actual market drop.

Which doesn't mean nobody knew. If one believes Schiff's and Panzner's worldview, then they've seen it coming for a couple of years. But these quotes don't really do much to support that.

According to a poll by the Strategic Counsel, the Conservatives would win 35% of the Canadian vote in an election held today—but they would lose some of their Quebec seats and remain a minority government.

The poll, conducted for the Globe and Mail and CTV, estimated that 35% of Canadians would vote Conservative, and 31% Liberal. The New Democrats would gain 16% of the vote, with the Green Party winning 10% and the Bloc Quebecois 9%.

But in Quebec the Conservatives would crash from 22% in the 2008 election to just 10% if the election were held today -- no better than the NDP and the Greens. The Liberals would take 30% of the vote, and the Bloc 40%.

In the rest of Canada the Tories would do reasonably well, the poll indicates: 41% in Ontario and 45% in the West. But both results show a sharp drop from last December, when the Conservatives enjoyed 50% support in Ontario and 61% in the West.

Between December and March, Liberals in Ontario saw support rise from 29% to 37%, and from 16% to 23% in the West.

The NDP, meanwhile, rose from 13% to 15% in Ontario, and from 16% to 20% in the West.

All of us in Ontario know Li'l' Jimmy.Sell public assets to balance the budget (Hwy 407).Fund faith based schools...which eventually sunk John Tory's boat.The man's only strength is that he can, by his visage, convince people that he knows what he is talking about.And now we will be subjected to having his wife run for the PC Party in ONWhy? 1) hates, hates, hates Dalton Mc2) lost the provincial leadership TWICE3) is truly (a) Randy4) wifey will obey...naturally5) he is short6) likes Mercedes better than GM's

It would be bit rich for Dodd to boast of advance knowledge of the recession, since he was one of the biggest boosters of the Fannie/Freddie policies that caused it. (He was also the #1 recipient of their campaign contributions...)

PS- Harper warned about tougher economic times ahead in December 2007... and the Liberals accused him of fearmongering.

"Then why did he lie to us saying the economic fundamentals were sound and call an election before the set election date and before we all found out about the mess???"

Probably because if he had dropped the writ after the US Presidential election, he would've run a bigger risk of losing.

And that's not only because Canadians would've had Obama envy going to the polls - which would be to Harper's disadvantage - but because the Cons obviously have no idea what they're doing when it comes to a recession.

so I guess using your logic this makes McGuinty as stupid as the rest of them, because truth be told Harper/Flaherty warned of a down turn long ago, BUT, those same experts and opposition said they were fear mongering.

Oh, and let's not forget that both Ontario oppositions were on their feet long ago warning Dalton of the manufacturing downturn. Hampton in particular.

The discussion viewed in its entirety proves what is wrong what government in Canada today: partisans of all stripes care more about their party's fortunes than they do about, say, the state of the economy.

Hell, use the Harper quote from the end of 2007 then as the tag on the video.

I was thinking that the quotes were recent but, as I linked to above, it wouldn't be hard to find some economists predicting a recession in early 2008. The US was already in a lot of trouble and it doesn't take an economist (or a senator) to figure out that we'd feel it too.

Now, in fairness, there's not much Flaherty could have done to prevent it, but you can't say "no one saw it coming" when, clearly, most people did.

Anon 4:46, how is it contradictory to say "Tougher times are ahead, but our economic fundamentals are sound"?

rc: Probably because if he had dropped the writ after the US Presidential election, he would've run a bigger risk of losing.

And that's not only because Canadians would've had Obama envy going to the polls - which would be to Harper's disadvantage...

I keep hearing this from Liberals, and I've yet to see any evidence for it. Obama was very popular in Canada before he won the election, so why would Nov 4th make any difference? Furthermore, the claim that Dion and the Liberals would somehow have gotten more popular because of Obama is also entirely unsubstantiated.

If anything, Harper would probably have benefited from Obama being President/President-elect during the Canadian election, since it would have deprived the Libs of the "sucking up to Bush" bogeyman that they've been relying on for the last six years.

I think "the fundamentals are sound" is one of the least understood phrases in the world. Ordinary people interpret it to mean "therefore we will not have economic bad times."

Not true. There is a business cycle (actually there are many cycles of varying length), and whatever happened the job numbers of 2007-8 were unsustainable.

To me, the fundamentals are sound means that banks will not collapse, that any recession will be followed by a recovery, and that in the long-run, there will be productivity growth at some better-than-anemic pace.

We are, after all, talking about only 1.5 years or so of poor economic times.